The group asks for the legal basis for holding Jude Anokwu and others at the State CID, Awka, and for an independent probe of alleged obstruction of bail.
The Rule of Law and Accountability Advocacy Centre (RULAAC) has petitioned the Inspector-General of Police, asking him to explain why Mr Jude Nwoye Anokwu and others remain in custody at the State Criminal Investigation Department (CID), Awka, Anambra State, despite police reportedly granting them bail.
In the petition, signed by its Executive Director, Okechukwu Nwanguma, the group said the issue was simple. “The central question is straightforward: what is the legal basis for keeping these men in custody after the police granted them bail?” it asked.
According to the petition, Mr. Anokwu and others were arrested at his residence in Udezu Village, Achalla, on Saturday, 17 October 2026, by persons identified as Operation Udogachi operatives. The operation reportedly involved violence, destruction of property and the shooting of his gatekeeper, Mr. Chibuzo Nkam.
RULAAC said it petitioned the Commissioner of Police, Anambra State, on 20 October. It sought disclosure of the allegations against the detainees, their release or production before a competent court, and an urgent investigation into the gatekeeper’s whereabouts and condition. The group said it later learned that police authorities directed the investigating officer on 21 October to grant the men bail and arrange a meeting between the parties.
RULAAC said it received conflicting accounts of what happened next. One report said the men were released and then rearrested by Operation Udogachi operatives. Another said their release was obstructed during the bail process after the investigating officer communicated with Mr. Ken Emeakayi, Special Adviser to the Governor on Community Security.
The second account alleges that Mr. Emeakayi sent a text message challenging the police leadership’s bail decision. The men were reportedly taken to Lion Building, which is associated with Operation Udogachi, refused admission, and returned to State CID at about 1 a.m. on 22 October. They were allegedly kept handcuffed in a bus during these movements.
Mr. Emeakayi has denied ordering their rearrest or return to custody. RULAAC said “the seriousness of the disputed accounts requires independent examination of the relevant communications, bail documents, custody registers and movement records.” It added that its latest information is that “the men remain detained.”
The group asked the IGP to direct the Commissioner of Police to answer eight questions in writing. They include who authorised the bail and on what conditions, whether those conditions were met, and whether the men were released and rearrested or prevented from leaving custody. They also ask who authorised their continued detention and under what legal provision, whether a court order authorises it, and who approved their movement to Lion Building. The last asks what communication took place between police personnel and Mr. Emeakayi or other state officials.
RULAAC cited Section 35 of the Constitution, which protects personal liberty. It said the police should identify the “precise legal authority relied upon for each person’s continued detention, rather than rely on a general assertion that investigation is ongoing.”
The group said a bail grant does not end an investigation, but that “continued investigation does not, by itself, explain why an authorised bail decision has not been implemented.” It added: “If bail conditions have been fulfilled and no other lawful basis for detention exists, the men should be released immediately.”
RULAAC said the underlying dispute concerns family land. It noted that Section 32(2) of the Police Act 2020 prohibits arrest merely for a civil wrong or breach of contract, but said any distinct allegation of violence or another crime “must nevertheless be investigated impartially and on its own evidence.”
The group also pointed to Mr. Anokwu’s arrest in July 2025 over the same dispute, his transfer to Zone 2 Command, Lagos, and his release after intervention. It said this history “warrants scrutiny of whether criminal processes are being used to advance private interests.”
RULAAC asked the IGP to order an immediate review of the detention of everyone arrested in connection with the incident, and to require the Anambra Command to disclose each detainee’s identity, arrest date, alleged offence, bail status and any judicial authority for detention. It also called for access to lawyers, families and medical care for the detainees.
The group further asked for an independent team, drawn from outside the units whose conduct is questioned, to investigate the alleged obstruction of bail, the rearrest, the overnight transfers and the reported use of handcuffs. It urged the police to preserve evidence, including the alleged text message, station diaries, custody registers, bail documents, vehicle logs and CCTV footage.
RULAAC also asked for an investigation into the shooting and reported death of Mr. Nkam, including establishing his whereabouts or the location of his remains and notifying his family, as well as into the alleged destruction of property and removal of vehicles and belongings. It said release must not be made conditional on accepting a land settlement, withdrawing a complaint, changing testimony or obtaining the consent of a complainant or political official, and asked for a written response stating the action taken and the legal basis, if any, for continued detention.
“The Police remain responsible for the legality and treatment of persons in their custody,” the petition said. “Any alleged pressure from outside the Force requires investigation; it cannot substitute for lawful authority to detain.”
RULAAC urged the IGP to act quickly “to resolve the bail question, protect the detainees and restore confidence in the impartial administration of justice.”
